![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
masque12http://slate.msn.com/id/2108122/
I was listening to the "debate" on the radio, and when Bush answered that first question by denying he said "I truly am not that concerned about him," I laughed my ass off because I remember seeing him say that very thing. I have to agree with the article's assessment of the differing strategies of Bush and Kerry on "fighting terror", and Kerry's method really does seem to be the better way.
In the interest of equal time, however, Kerry is full of shit on the assault weapon ban, and proved it in his own statement. He talked about how he was for the ban, because cops were, and told some story about a drug bust where the guy arrested had an AK-47. Well, dumbass, if the guy has an AK-47 while the ban is IN PLACE, how does that mean that banning assault weapons is going to keep cops safe? I fail to understand his logic.
Yep, I'm still voting for Badnarik.
I was listening to the "debate" on the radio, and when Bush answered that first question by denying he said "I truly am not that concerned about him," I laughed my ass off because I remember seeing him say that very thing. I have to agree with the article's assessment of the differing strategies of Bush and Kerry on "fighting terror", and Kerry's method really does seem to be the better way.
In the interest of equal time, however, Kerry is full of shit on the assault weapon ban, and proved it in his own statement. He talked about how he was for the ban, because cops were, and told some story about a drug bust where the guy arrested had an AK-47. Well, dumbass, if the guy has an AK-47 while the ban is IN PLACE, how does that mean that banning assault weapons is going to keep cops safe? I fail to understand his logic.
Yep, I'm still voting for Badnarik.
